Among the two or three worst acts recorded in the annul of South Asian history, the most hideous crime was the partition of India in 1947.

Yes, Pakistan in this manner was created at a huge human price, and the worst among them was almost the genocide of more than 20,000 Hindus and Sikhs by the Pakistani army. The question lingers: Would these lives have been saved if Jawaharlal Nehru, the first-ever Prime Minister of the country India, had done differently?

The Partition and Its Bloody Sequel

The quickly-sketched Radcliffe Line foreparting India into two nations officially led to violence and organised migration. Tens of millions are displaced people in search of a place to live a life free from persecution. But the process was not very smooth.

In this context, the Hindus and Sikhs in Rawalpindi, Lahore, and the North West Frontier Province became the principal victims of brutal repression.

Pakistani armed soldiers and local groups engaged in genocide, including genocide of the minority, while women and girls were raped or forcibly married and converted to Islam. Villages were eradicated clean, with people left shocked, injured, homeless, or just losing their loved ones.

Where was Nehru?

The leadership role of Jawaharlal Nehru during this crucial phase has been the subject of a lot of criticism. Being the first Prime Minister of India, Nehru had the duty to protect all Indians, regardless of where they were, left behind in the new state of Pakistan. But as much as it focused on diplomacy and internal affairs, it seemed to pay little attention to the escalating brutality.

According to several sources, threats of violence against Hindus and Sikhs were either not taken seriously or were dismissed by Nehru’s government. While receiving reports on the genocide of these people and the armed forces targeting them, Nehru did not have the political will to protect these vulnerable groups of people. Such a conciliatory approach in insufficient funding or involving pressure on Pakistan has made many historians doubt his strategy during this rupture.

The Scale of the Massacre

The carnage inflicted on Hindus and Sikhs was appalling in Pakistan. Some of the witnesses relate to rather heartbreaking incidences of arriving trains in the Indian subcontinent carrying dead bodies of men, women, and children hacked, families butchered. They raped women and forced them into conversion; some were killed even unborn; children butchered mercilessly. Temple became defiled, and many a residential house was set on fire.

Taking into account these principles of estimation, the death toll of nearly 20,000 is a severe underestimation. Many more became refugees; they had to abandon their forefathers’ lands and migrate to India naked as dand.

Nehru’s negligence or miscalculation?

Nehru’s failure during this period can be attributed to several factors:

1. Over-reliance on diplomacy:

Nehru shared an optimistic view of a good relationship with Pakistan and has faith in dialogue to reduce the act of violence. Due to this idealistic attitude, the intervention process was initiated late in India.

2. Underestimating the Threat:

Nehru failed to judge the quantum of communalism inherent in Pakistani society. The administration ignored initial signals, let alone the act of admitting that they failed to prevent the violence from worsening.

3. Focus on Internal Issues:

It appears that Nehru’s policy after the partition of India did not pay adequate attention to the problem of Hindus and Sikhs in Pakistan.

4. Lack of Military Action:

While having an effective military machine, for some reason Nehru did not employ force or resources to safeguard minorities in Pakistan. His hesitation cost thousands of people.

5. The Human Cost

However painful as this is to say, for the survivors of this genocide, the wounds are still sore. People were displaced, their livelihoods killed, and they lost their loved ones to this terrible disease. Those few who were able to survive and flee to India take with them horrific tales of what they had gone through. Losing people, betrayal by the government, and many other things make people feel pain, which has been inherited for generations.

Lessons from History

The sacrifice of 1947 is a stern lesson for political misjudgement and complacency. The lack of action on Nehru’s part during this period led to thousands of casualties and essentially wittingly propagated more of the same for future South Asian conflicts.

These are some of the past mistakes that should not be made again, and that is why whenever a historical mistake is identified, it must be corrected. The safety of the public remains an important area of focus for any government. While it is possible to negotiate with almost anybody and even have faith in everyone, this is achievable only if it is not for the price of people’s lives.

The Road Ahead

Though the scars of partition can never fade away, it is really important to keep these narratives relevant. They make us recall how costly it is for politicians to stand on the fence and how susceptible minorities are. The killings of Hindus and Sikhs in 1947 have not remained a part of the history book, but it serves the future leaders as an example of how one should act and react in the condition of human sadism.

However it is to evaluate Nehru’s legacy, his fall during this crisis cannot be overlooked. Thus, now that India is trying to find out where it stands in the world, it should never allow such a loss of life as was witnessed in 1947.